An Engineer's Perspective Assignment 01

Ivan L Chen Word Count: 914 September 2, 2011

a.

Cell phone use in a vehicle has been constantly reviewed by academic and federal authorities

due to the concern that distracted driving resulting from the increased use of electronic devices has led and will continue to lead to car accidents and deaths. Multiple statistics have shown that the use of electronic devices has led to riskier driving. Using a cell phone in a vehicle for more than 50 minutes per month is associated with a 559% increased risk to be involved in a traffic accident (Sugano, 13). Handsfree devices have been touted as a solution to distracted driving, but some studies have shown that while driving safety is greatly improved, the problems of communication while driving still exist. Compared to the 900% increased risk of being involved in a car accident while using a phone, the 200% increased risk while using hands-free devices is still substantial (Sugano, 13). From the New Jersey

Department of Transportation records dating from 2006 to 2008, drivers using hands-free phones were involved in 4,530 crashes. In the same time frame, 5,541 crashes due to illegal use of hand-held cell phones occurred (Harper). Because the user base of those who use hands-free phones is much greater than those who illegally use hand-held cell phones while driving, the statistics convey that using handsfree devices alleviates much driver distraction. It may seem easy to just eliminate any distraction altogether by making all cell phone use illegal but studies estimate that the loss of the ability to use a cell phone in a car through such regulations would cost close to $23 billion in productivity (Hahn, 11). The distractions while using a hands-free device can be closely associated with speaking with a passenger in the car because both divert the driver's attention without the driver having to take a hand off the wheel. The majority of distractioncaused accidents that occur are related to eating or smoking; cell phone use only constitutes 11% of all distracted accidents (Provisional). For these reasons, it seems to be more appropriate to allow the use of hands-free devices but to eliminate all usage of hand-held devices, thus abating much of the distraction that cell phones bring while keeping productivity largely intact. It would be the balance between taking too much action and no action at all.

b.

In theory, having restrictions on all future hand-held cell phones to prevent people from using

them while driving is a great idea but it seems rather hard to implement. What seems like a possible solution is the Key2SafeDriving product which is installed through software into the cell phone and then connected to a device attached to the dashboard of a car. When the car is in ignition, the device reroutes all calls directly to voicemail and blocks all other communications as well. However, this device is designed for people under the care of someone else as the set up is handled by an administrator and removal of the rerouting device sends messages to the administrator. It is clearly not meant to be used on a wide scale and it would be an unnecessary hassle for states to have to monitor these devices. A new product by ZoomSafer takes the problem of wide-scale applicability and solves many of the issues. It focuses on employees in businesses who drive company cars or trucks. The system is installed through software on cell phones rather than through hardware by phone manufacturers and it can detect whether a person is driving in a car or not through a network connection. It prohibits the receiving of emails or texts while the driver is operating the vehicle while enabling hands-free calling. This would be very useful for those operating in businesses but it does not cover the actions of the employees outside of business hours nor does it cover phones that do not transmit data. The

ZoomSafer is only able to work because the employees do not use public transit or ride as a passenger in other vehicles during working hours, avoiding many of the problems that would befall from those situations. Programs such as ZoomSafer appear to be able to be implemented on a large scale but forcing manufacturers to create safety switches on new phones does bring up many auxiliary problems. It could detect if the occupant was moving at the speed of a car if it had a network connection but how does the phone differentiate between a driver in a car and a passenger in a car or if the occupant is sitting on a bus rather than driving a car? Access to the internet from cell phones is not widespread enough to

implement the tracking technology even if the technology were able to differentiate between bus and car travel. If such policies were implemented, it would only affect a fraction of the cell phone-using population as well as stagnate the cell phone industry as it is likely that people would be hesitant to adopt the new changes and purchase new phones that are required to have safety switches. There is also the problem that there will continue to be non-data cell phones on the market for years to come and to restrict only the cell phone users that have access to the internet would be looked down upon by the public and businesses. Also, there is always the option for cell phone users to turn off their network connectivity temporarily which would render the restrictions useless. To force all these factors to work would severely limit personal freedom unless solutions can be found for the several obstacles posed. In the end, it seems like the best solution would be to leave safety switches out of cell phones until new revolutionary ideas can allow for a seamless transition that allows for both freedom and safety.

Bibliography

"FleetSafer Mobile Proactively Prevents Employee Cell Phone Use While Driving | ZoomSafer." ZoomSafer Prevents Distracted Driving. Web. 01 Sept. 2011. <http://zoomsafer.com/products/fleetsafer/mobile/>. Hahn, R. W., & Tetlock, P. C. (1999). The economics of regulating cellular phones in vehicles. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies. Harper, Derek. "Statistics Show Hands-free Cell Phone Use While Driving Is Just as Dangerous." Press of Atlantic City. 23 May 2010. Web. 01 Sept. 2011. Provisional 2001 Statewide Collection Totals and Selected Inattentions. Rep. Sacramento: CHP Office of Public Affairs, 2002. "Safe Driving Systems." Safe Driving Systems, LLC | Stay Alive. Hang Up and Drive!Web. 01 Sept. 2011. <http://safedrivingsystems.com/products/>. Sugano, Dean. Cell Phone Use and Motor Vehicle Collisions: A Review of the Studies. Rep. Vol. 4. Honolulu: Legislative Reference Bureau, 2005. Print.